- (1.)The facts brought on the record of this petition which has been filed for quashing the order dated 6.11.1998 passed by the Commissioner and Secretary to Government of Haryana, Town and Country Planning Department, Authority (hereinafter described as 'HUDA') connive with the plot holders for causing loss to the very public authority which they pretend to serve.
(2.)Although, for the reasons best known to it, the petitioner has not placed on record copy of the letter of allotment and, therefore, we are not in a position to know as to when the plot in question was allotted and what are the terms and conditions of allotment but a careful reading of the record shows that industrial plot No. 26, Sector 25, Faridabad was originally allotted (jointly) to Smt. Lilawati, Subhash Chand Kohli and Chander Mohan. Later on, the same was transferred to the petitioner subject to the condition that the construction will be started within six months and completed within next 15 months.
(3.)Proceedings under Section 17 of the Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1977 Act') were initiated against the petitioner due to non-construction of building within the stipulated time. Notices dated 25.8.1989, 30.11.1989 and 23.3.1990 were issued to the petitioner under Section 17(3) and 17(4) of the 1977 Act but it failed to erect the building in accordance with the letter of allotment and Haryana Urban Development Authority (Erection of Buildings) Regulations, 1979. Consequently, the Estate Officer passed order Annexure P-2 dated 9.7.1990 for resumption of the site and forfeiture of Rs. 6,210/- out of the amount deposited by the petitioner. The appeal preferred by the petitioner under Section 17(5) of the 1977 Act was dismissed by the Administrator, HUDA, Faridabad (exercising the powers of the Chief Administrator, HUDA) on 17.9.1990. The relevant portion of the appellate order is reproduced below:
"The appellant states that due to his financial condition, he could not begin the construction work. Now his financial condition has improved. Therefore, the plot may be restored and time be granted for construction.

Representative of HUDA states that the plot was transferred in the name of the appellant on 8.10.1986 , on the condition that he shall start construction work on the plot within six months and shall complete it within fifteen months. The appellant has violated conditions of transfer. Not only that in a period of four years, he has shown no interest in making any construction on the plot, therefore, the appeal may be dismissed.

I have heard both the parties and have perused the record. The plot is with the appellant for the last four years and till now he has made no construction on the plot, on the other hand the construction should have been completed within fifteen months. Not only this the appellant has taken no definite steps for making the construction. The appellant has not brought any proof from which it can be made out that he is interested in raising construction and starting a factory. Nor has he initiated any proceedings with any bank or a financial institution for raising a loan. The negotiations which he says are presently being undertaken with Haryana Financial Corporation should have been done immediately after the transfer of plot. Non-action on part of the appellant for four years indicates that he was not interested in construction of a factory but had retained the plot only with profit motive, this is not only in contravention of conditions of transfer but is also against the policy of Haryana Government.

Keeping in view the above mentioned facts, while dismissing the appeal under consideration, the order of Estate Officer, dated 9.7.1990, vide which the plot was resumed and Rs. 6,210/- from the deposited amount be forfeited is upheld.
Pronounced Sd/- Administrator, 17.9.1990. HUDA, Faridabad. "